Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Ready for a generation of war?

That's what Sen. Brownback wants:



The summary over at Think Progress:

On Wednesday, the Senate voted 97-0 to pass a resolution sponsored by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) to censure Iran “for what it said was complicity in the killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.” The resolution required the Bush administration to regularly report to Congress on Iran’s role in Iraq.

While the resolution explicitly rejected authorization for immediate military action, the gist of the resolution declared Iran is participating in acts of war against the United States, thereby laying the foundation for a confrontation with Iran. Newshoggers wrote that the resolution may provide the “political cover for launching a war.”

Validating the concern many felt, Sen. Sam Brownback appeared on Fox News shortly after the vote and declared he was ready to preemptively strike Iran. Host Sean Hannity asked Brownback, “There’s probably going to come a point for the next president that they’re going to have to determine whether to go out and have that preemptive strike. And you’re ready and would be ready to do that?”

“Yes, I am, and I think we have to be,” Brownback answered. “Sean, if we’re going to be serious about this fight, and we’re in this fight, and probably for a generation. We’re probably in this fight for a generation.”
And to drive home the message of what the unanimous vote in the Senate in favor of the Lieberman resolution means, Think Progress adds further:

When the Congress vote to authorize force against Iraq in 2002, it cited as justification the fact that Congress had passed a law in 1998 sponsored by Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) and co-sponsored by Lieberman that concluded Iraq posed a serious threat. From the 2002 resolution:

Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that Iraq’s continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in ‘material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations’ and urged the President ‘to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations’

Get the picture? As Arthur Silber pointed out a few weeks ago, the House of Representatives offered up similar political cover for a war against Iran that was also practically unanimous (the lone "no" votes came from Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and Ron Paul (R-TX).

Let that sink in for a spell.

Practically every aspiring Democrat and Republican presidential candidate for the 2008 election currently holding a seat in one of the house of the Congress, EXCEPT for Kucinich and Paul are on record as on board to involve the US in yet another war! The current House Speaker Nancy ("Impeachment is Not on the Table") Pelosi (D-CA) is on board to involve the US in yet another war! Never mind that the public may becoming increasingly weary of these wars, and that the Dems likely owe their current majorities due to that rising anti-war sentiment. This Congress simply does not give a damn. I realize this comes as a shock to our nation's liberal and progressive intelligentsia (including those in blogtopia, as IOZ points out), but your "anti-war" Democrats want more war. Although I admire the courage of those very few souls in Congress who really don't want to add to the bloodshed, let's face it: those exceptional Congress critters have as much influence on their respective parties' leaderships as blades of grass on a lawnmower.

No comments:

Post a Comment